Allen

Penrose, NC

#34703 Feb 3, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
I don't fight with stupid women like you Allen.You being a dirty coward, maybe you can find someone and stab them in the back, that seems to be your specialty.
You don't have to fight with me. The devil in you does it for you. ROF & LMFAO
Allen

Penrose, NC

#34704 Feb 3, 2013
High Five wrote:
<quoted text>
High Five man, you got that right.
Back at ya High Five. I love PA, beautiful country side and great people!
Allen

Penrose, NC

#34705 Feb 3, 2013
emlu wrote:
<quoted text>Meet ya the branch, I'll bring the "twinkie". You remember the branch don't ya? You talked about it enough, you knew all about the "ole' ways".
Sure go ahead and bring your Texas "Twinkie" Waco. I'll show him the way. Branch lettuce and ramps are not quite in season yet, but it won't be long. Better get a move on seasoning the iron. Mines ready to roll:)
TSF

Kenly, NC

#34706 Feb 3, 2013
Oh no, you are FOS again. In the first post you claimed that there was no mention of shooting down the glider. So your very own link proved you FOS. Now you are claiming the airport manager was seeking fame when actually, the idiots had invaded her airport and were instructing her to communicate with the glider pilot because they didn't even know the frequencies. I doubt you would be seeking fame when a gang of idiots with guns are running around saying they are commandeering your airport and are threatening to shoot down a glider of all things. Are your eyes brown half way up or completely brown to the top?
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
"Vietcong"did just that in Vietnam...argue semantics with them much?
I didn't think so...my point was is you, like most, were not posting the entire story and only using parts that you felt were supporting your argument.
I gladly take to heart the opinion and insight of the Darlington, SC sheriffs office on what they deem is a viable threat than that of some broad trying to get her 15 minutes of fame in a sensationalized story.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#34708 Feb 3, 2013
Australia confiscated guns to make people safe. The results: 1. Aggravated Assaults increased 28% 2. Home invasions increased 21% 3. murders increased 19%
Aussies call that gun confiscation legislation the Criminal Empowerment Act.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34709 Feb 3, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
The bigger they are the harder they fall. Now go eat a box of twinkies.
Sorry Allen, that you're taken so much heat; for something so ridiculous. It's evident that there are many people with more serious problems than me. Which really makes me feel quite good!

Have a nice evening Allen, you really seem like a nice and genuine person. Too bad I didn't get to talk to you more. To deal with this junk; I'd rather fight in Iraq barehanded.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34710 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Oh no, you are FOS again. In the first post you claimed that there was no mention of shooting down the glider. So your very own link proved you FOS. Now you are claiming the airport manager was seeking fame when actually, the idiots had invaded her airport and were instructing her to communicate with the glider pilot because they didn't even know the frequencies. I doubt you would be seeking fame when a gang of idiots with guns are running around saying they are commandeering your airport and are threatening to shoot down a glider of all things. Are your eyes brown half way up or completely brown to the top?
<quoted text>
Semantics guy. Semantics.

And, as usual, your information is incorrect.

I figure you for the "Excessive use of force" types if they had shot the glider down.
LuLu

Lenoir, NC

#34711 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Oh no, you are FOS again. In the first post you claimed that there was no mention of shooting down the glider. So your very own link proved you FOS. Now you are claiming the airport manager was seeking fame when actually, the idiots had invaded her airport and were instructing her to communicate with the glider pilot because they didn't even know the frequencies. I doubt you would be seeking fame when a gang of idiots with guns are running around saying they are commandeering your airport and are threatening to shoot down a glider of all things. Are your eyes brown half way up or completely brown to the top?
<quoted text>
TSF, can you think of a better way to deliver an incendiary device than a glider? Like was said before, lucky the guy wasn't shot down. The glider should have known better even if the ones on the ground didn't.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34712 Feb 3, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Semantics guy. Semantics.
And, as usual, your information is incorrect.
I figure you for the "Excessive use of force" types if they had shot the glider down.
"Semantics" is the new Republican code word for "You've got my ass nailed up on the wall on that one, and I have no intelligent response to come back with".

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#34713 Feb 3, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
"Semantics" is the new Republican code word for "You've got my ass nailed up on the wall on that one, and I have no intelligent response to come back with".
oooohhhh!

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34714 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Australia confiscated guns to make people safe. The results: 1. Aggravated Assaults increased 28% 2. Home invasions increased 21% 3. murders increased 19%
Aussies call that gun confiscation legislation the Criminal Empowerment Act.
Here Here

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34715 Feb 3, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
"Semantics" is the new Republican code word for "You've got my ass nailed up on the wall on that one, and I have no intelligent response to come back with".
But your side is notorious for using semantics. You shouldn't throw rocks when you live in a glass house!
TSF

Kenly, NC

#34716 Feb 3, 2013
Wrong again. I would NOT call it excessive use of force. I would call it ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL USE OF FORCE because 1. local LE does not have the authority or jurisdiction to shoot down any aircraft for any reason 2. because the pilot had violated no airspace restriction, 3.had violated no laws 4. had not violated any FAA rules 5. Only military command structure can order the shooting down of a civilian aircraft. As you leave the USA , how about taking other idiots like those in Darlington County with you.
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Semantics guy. Semantics.
And, as usual, your information is incorrect.
I figure you for the "Excessive use of force" types if they had shot the glider down.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#34717 Feb 3, 2013
Yes, I think almost any way , including burros, would be a better method. Since gliders have no engine, they cannot be just driven from point A directly to point B. Gliders have to CIRCLE to find lift and gain altitude to move to the next thermal or wave , where ever that might be . When they lose lift and altitude, they have to land, where ever that might be. Also, because of weight considerations, gliders are so light that breaking thorugh a wall in a frame house would be questionable. Breaking through a 15 ft thick steel reinforced containment building would be impossible, even for a 787 jetliner. But I must say that this discussion has been a learning experience for me personally. I never dreamed that there ore folks who can read and write that would have such misunderstanding of the law and of physics.
LuLu wrote:
<quoted text>TSF, can you think of a better way to deliver an incendiary device than a glider? Like was said before, lucky the guy wasn't shot down. The glider should have known better even if the ones on the ground didn't.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#34718 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Wrong again. I would NOT call it excessive use of force. I would call it ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL USE OF FORCE because 1. local LE does not have the authority or jurisdiction to shoot down any aircraft for any reason 2. because the pilot had violated no airspace restriction, 3.had violated no laws 4. had not violated any FAA rules 5. Only military command structure can order the shooting down of a civilian aircraft. As you leave the USA , how about taking other idiots like those in Darlington County with you.
<quoted text>
What DOES constitute an airspace violation?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34719 Feb 3, 2013
Pro-American wrote:
<quoted text>But your side is notorious for using semantics. You shouldn't throw rocks when you live in a glass house!
You're playing Republican dodge ball again. Let's see some examples

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#34720 Feb 3, 2013
Prohibited airspace is marked with a"P", followed by a number, on aeronautical charts.For instance, the area over Camp David, where the president might be.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34721 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Wrong again. I would NOT call it excessive use of force. I would call it ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL USE OF FORCE because 1. local LE does not have the authority or jurisdiction to shoot down any aircraft for any reason 2. because the pilot had violated no airspace restriction, 3.had violated no laws 4. had not violated any FAA rules 5. Only military command structure can order the shooting down of a civilian aircraft. As you leave the USA , how about taking other idiots like those in Darlington County with you.
<quoted text>
Don't have the authority? Um, the nuclear power plant security team called the Sheriffs office of Darlington County, SC. Not the military. Since the problem is and was a local law enforcement problem, the local law enforcement would use all available means necessary to thwart or deter the threat deemed necessary.

But, the sheriff clearly states these types of incidents are not the norm and normally, they only deal with aircraft incidents once they have crashed. Based upon that info alone, I'd say the pilot should attend the nearest local church service and give thanks the deputies restrained themselves.

Not once have I disputed the containment buildings would be able to withstand from most aircraft, let alone a glider, but most people do not know that kind of information nor care. Look at the response to Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Terrible and horific tragedy by any stretch of the imagination, but democrats have jumped all over more "gun legislation."

Your attempts to sensationalize this story is no different. Democrat ploy, antics and tactics.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#34722 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Yes, I think almost any way , including burros, would be a better method. Since gliders have no engine, they cannot be just driven from point A directly to point B. Gliders have to CIRCLE to find lift and gain altitude to move to the next thermal or wave , where ever that might be . When they lose lift and altitude, they have to land, where ever that might be. Also, because of weight considerations, gliders are so light that breaking thorugh a wall in a frame house would be questionable. Breaking through a 15 ft thick steel reinforced containment building would be impossible, even for a 787 jetliner. But I must say that this discussion has been a learning experience for me personally. I never dreamed that there ore folks who can read and write that would have such misunderstanding of the law and of physics.
<quoted text>
OK, TSF, but I've been tandom with a friend of mine and I kinda get the glider thing. At one time Grandfather Mountain held championship comptitions, now they go off "Tater Hill" in Boone. It doesn't change the fact that you really should have better sense than to circle a power plant. The pilot I know said the guy was "an idiot".

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34723 Feb 3, 2013
TSF wrote:
Wrong again. I would NOT call it excessive use of force. I would call it ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL USE OF FORCE because 1. local LE does not have the authority or jurisdiction to shoot down any aircraft for any reason 2. because the pilot had violated no airspace restriction, 3.had violated no laws 4. had not violated any FAA rules 5. Only military command structure can order the shooting down of a civilian aircraft. As you leave the USA , how about taking other idiots like those in Darlington County with you.
<quoted text>
And again, you are wrong. Reasonable amount of force necessary to deter or thwart a threat is given to all citizens, not just law enforcement or the military.

And you are correct, the pilot did not deviate any flight plans or restricted airspace nor violated any FAA rules. However, most local law enforcement officers responding to an incident, including supervisors, probably aren't well versed in FAA rules or regulations.

But is it is their responsiblity to protect and serve all citizens from all threats, not the ones YOU feel are credible.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wallburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
buy CHEAP pain med online for sale (Jun '13) Oct '13 tempestt 2
OG Kush, Green Crack, Purple Kush, AK-47, (Jul '13) Jul '13 Bubba Kush 1
Sept. 7 Public Record (Sep '11) Nov '12 whatever 2
Bikers invade Davidson County for Tour de Pig (Oct '10) Oct '10 Big Boy 1
Woman jailed for 17 break-ins (Sep '10) Sep '10 PERRY 2
Store owner faces fraud charges after ordering ... (Jan '10) Jan '10 Dirtrider 1
Family and friends gather for last rites of thr... (Apr '08) Apr '08 family from Syra... 1
Wallburg Dating
Find my Match

Wallburg Jobs

Wallburg People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Wallburg News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Wallburg

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]